Balajigari v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 673

The case of Balajigari v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 673, relates to the issues under Tier 1 General refusals in conjunction with paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules HC395. We have highlighted a few important matters for consideration.

Here are some relevant details taken from the case itself. If you wish to take advice on this matter, then please contact us on 0207 237 3388 or email our team on info@icslegal.com. 

The appeal had the following findings:

  1. A number of appeals brought forward to the Tribunal and Courts is whether paragraph 322(5) applies which considers whether it is “undesirable” for a person to be granted indefinite leave to remain.
  2. If this does, this case law, as well as many matters before the Tribunal and Courts, is that this paragraph is not mandatory but more of presumptive, in other words, that each matter must be considered correctly.

There must be: (i) reliable evidence of (ii) sufficiently reprehensible conduct; and (iii) an assessment, taking proper account of all relevant circumstances known about the applicant at the date of decision, of whether his or her presence in the UK is undesirable (this should include evidence of positive features of their character). Again, that seems to us a correct and helpful analysis of the exercise required at the first stage, but it will be useful to say something more about the elements in it, especially as they apply to an earnings discrepancy case.

The recognition of dishonesty as a touchstone in the context of the general grounds of refusal, albeit a different ground relating to “false representations”, is consonant with the approach of Rix LJ in Adedoyin v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 773, [2011] 1 WLR 564, at paras. 76-79. At para. 77 he said:

“If it were otherwise, then an applicant whose false representation was in no way dishonest would not only suffer mandatory refusal but would also be barred from re-entry for ten years if he was removed or deported. That might not in itself be so very severe a rule, if only because the applicant always has the option of voluntary departure. If, however, he has to be assisted at the expense of the Secretary of State, then the ban is for five years. Most seriously of all, however, is the possibility … that an applicant for entry clearance … who had made an entirely innocent representation, innocent not only so far as his personal honesty is concerned but also in its origins, would be barred from re-entry under paragraph 320(7B)(ii) for ten years, even if he left the UK voluntarily.”

Martin Spencer J begins para. 32 of his judgment by saying:

“The starting point seems to me to be that, where the Secretary of State discovers a significant difference between the income claimed in a previous application for leave to remain and the income declared to HMRC (as here) she is entitled to draw an inference that the Applicant has been deceitful or dishonest and therefore he should be refused ILR within paragraph 322 (5) of the Immigration Rules.”

At para. 37 (iii) Martin Spencer J said:

“In approaching that fact-finding task, the Secretary of State should remind herself that, although the standard of proof is the ‘balance of probability’, a finding that a person has been deceitful and dishonest in relation to his tax affairs with the consequence that he is denied settlement in this country is a very serious finding with serious consequences.”

In Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (no. 2) [2013] UKSC 39, [2014] AC 700, Lord Neuberger (after having cited at para. 178 the above passage from Doody) said, at para. 179:

“In my view, the rule is that, before a statutory power is exercised, any person who foreseeably would be significantly detrimentally affected by the exercise should be given the opportunity to make representations in advance, unless (i) the statutory provisions concerned expressly or impliedly provide otherwise or (ii) the circumstances in which the power is to be exercised would render it impossible, impractical or pointless to afford such an opportunity. I would add that any argument advanced in support of impossibility, impracticality or pointlessness should be very closely examined, as a court will be slow to hold that there is no obligation to give the opportunity, when such an obligation is not dispensed with in the relevant statute.”

The findings on the above is fundamental to consideration and provides the burden on the Applicant, rather that of the decision maker, here it is concerning the Secretary of State.

The Judge went into his findings of the following:

“The availability of administrative review is not an answer, not least because the applicant is not normally allowed to produce evidence that was not produced before the original decision. That unlawfulness can be avoided for the future by the Secretary of State adopting a “minded to” procedure, which informs applicants of his concerns and gives them the opportunity to show cause why ILR should not be refused by offering an innocent explanation of the discrepancies (which will need to be particularised and documented so far as possible) and/or drawing attention to matters relevant to the “undesirability” or “discretion” issues. In Albert there was (at least arguably) a distinct unlawfulness, in that the Secretary of State failed to make an explicit finding of dishonesty.”

Finally, we find the following is an important matter:

“The two previous points are determinative of the present appeals because the Appellants have in these proceedings challenged the paragraph 322 (5) refusals only on conventional public law grounds. But we have expressed the view in Part B above that if the applicant enjoys a private or family life in the UK which is protected by article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights – which is likely to be so in the typical case – the notice of liability to removal which is the consequence of refusal of ILR will constitute an interference with those rights which the Secretary of State will have to justify. If the earnings discrepancies relied on were in fact the result of dishonesty that will normally be sufficient justification, but his decision on that question will be reviewable as a matter of fact, whether in the context of a “human rights appeal” or, where no such appeal is available, in judicial review proceedings: the circumstances in which an appeal will be available are considered in Part C.”

Read More

No deal arrangements for EU citizens & family members

As the UK Government is going through negotiations, it is important that EEA nationals and their family members understand their legal rights. 

EEA nationals will have right to enter the UK but these will be limited. The following is a short summary of what has been proposed by the UK Government. For stays longer than 3 months, European Temporary Leave to Remain will be required.

If the UK leaves the EU without agreeing a deal, the government will seek to end free movement as soon as possible and has introduced an Immigration Bill to achieve this. For a transitional period only, EEA citizens and their family members, including Swiss citizens, will still be able to come to the UK for visits, work or study and they will be able to enter the UK as they do now.

However, to stay longer than 3 months they will need to apply for permission and receive European Temporary Leave to Remain, which is valid for a further 3 years. EU citizens wishing to stay for longer than 3 years will need to make a further application under the new skills-based future immigration system, which will begin from 2021.

 

The information set out today also confirms that if there is no deal:

  1. EU citizens arriving in the UK who wish to stay longer than 3 months and apply for European Temporary Leave to Remain will be subject to identity, criminality and security checks before being granted permission to stay for three years.
  2. Non-EU family members who wish to accompany an EU citizen under these arrangements will need to apply in advance for a family permit.
  3. EU citizens will be able to enter and leave the UK as they do now, using e-gates when travelling on a biometric passport
    the initial 3 months’ leave to enter for EU citizens will be free of charge but applications for European Temporary Leave to Remain will be paid for. Fees will be set out at a later date.
  4. Irish citizens will not need to apply for European Temporary Leave to Remain and will continue to have the right to enter and live in the UK under the Common Travel Area.

The Home Secretary has set out plans for a new single skills-based immigration system which will operate from 2021. It will enable employers to attract the skills they need from around the world, while ensuring net migration is reduced to sustainable levels.

If you wish to take some advice on this, please either call us on 0207 237 3388 or you can email us at info@icslegal.com. You can also complete the free assessment by clicking here

Read More

The UK’s future skills-based immigration system

The Government has published its guidance on the future of the UKVI’s new reformed immigration system:

  1. During the Implementation Period, Home Office will implement the EU Settlement Scheme. This gives EU citizens already here, and also those who arrive in the UK during the Implementation Period, the opportunity to secure their future residence in the UK. The UK has agreed with the EU on rights for EU citizens already living in the UK and UK nationals living in the EU, to enable them to carry on with their lives broadly as now. The Government is finalising arrangements with negotiating with European Free Trade Association (EFTA) States – Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland – to bring about similar arrangements for their citizens.
  2. The Government has made clear that the CTA and associated rights between the UK, Ireland and the Crown Dependencies will be unaffected by the UK’s exit. Irish and British citizens will continue to enjoy the freedom to travel within the CTA without the need for immigration controls or residence/work permits. Irish citizens do not need to obtain settled status in the UK.
  3. The UK will leave the EU on 29 March 2019. There will be an Implementation Period, planned to run until 31 December 2020, during which current rules will continue to apply. During that time, EU citizens will be able to enter and reside under the terms of the UK Regulations which implement the current, pre-Exit rules. EU citizens and their family members who wish to remain in the UK after the end of the Implementation Period must apply for the EU Settlement Scheme. They have until June 2021 to do so, if the Implementation Period ends on 31 December 2020.
  4. After the UK’s exit and following the Implementation Period, Home Office will end the current free movement system imposed by the EU so that the UK Immigration Rules will apply to EU and non-EU migrants alike in a single skills-based system, as opposed to being based on where an individual comes from, where anyone who wants to come to the UK will need permission to do so, as opposed to being based on where an individual comes from.
  5. Youth Mobility Scheme after the UK leaves the EU, may decide to include EU nationals. This will allow a 2 years permit free employment.
  6. Home Office do not intend to require visitors who are citizens of current EU Member States to obtain a visit visa in advance of travel and they intend to allow them to continue to use e-gates to make entry quick and easy. Home Office propose to make binding commitments to this effect in a future mobility partnership, if the EU reciprocates. Tourists will continue to enjoy a generous entitlement to spend up to six months in the UK. Visitors coming to the UK for short-term business reasons will be able, as now, to carry out a wide range of activities, including permitted paid engagements.
  7. Under the future system following the Implementation Period, those coming to the UK, including EU citizens, who intend to work or study or join family will need permission to do so, normally in the form of an electronic status which must be obtained before coming to the UK. This means everyone coming the UK will have an individual immigration status which will form the basis of our immigration controls. This status will be communicated to airlines to confirm whether an individual has permission to travel, checked at the UK border (by either a Border Force officer or an e-gate), and then form the basis of in-country immigration checks.
  8. Following the recent MAC report on students, Home Office intend to improve the current offer to those who have completed a degree who want to stay on in the UK to work after they have completed their studies, by offering six months’ post-study leave to all master’s students, and bachelor’s students studying at an institution with degree awarding powers – giving them more time to find permanent skilled work and to work temporarily during that period. Those who have completed a PhD will have a year. Home Office will also allow for students studying at bachelor’s level or above to be able to apply to switch into the skilled workers route up to three months before the end of their course in the UK, and from outside of the UK for two years after their graduation.

Further updates to follow. If you would like to seek legal advice from ICS Legal, please email us at info@icslegal.com or call us on 0207 237 3388. You can also complete our free assessment by clicking here

Read More

KO (Nigeria) [2018] UKSC 53 and Rhuppiah [2018] UKSC 58

The case of KO (Nigeria) [2018] UKSC 53 and Rhuppiah [2018] UKSC 58 plays an important role towards Tribunal’s decision, whether a removal direction is lawful in line with Article 8 ECHR. By the Immigration Act 2014, Parliament introduced Part 5A to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 which seeks to direct courts and tribunals as to how to conduct this balancing exercise. KO (Nigeria) and Rhuppiah are the first cases in which the Supreme Court has had to consider these provisions. In doing so, the Supreme Court has largely continued to narrow the scope of protection provided for migrants in the UK by Article 8.

Rhuppiah [2018] UKSC 58 concerned s 117B(3) and (5). Mrs Rhuppiah, a Tanzanian national, entered the UK in 1997 with leave to remain for 3 months in 1997. She was granted various other periods of leave to remain, although sometimes with breaks between her visas during which time she was in the UK unlawfully. While studying at college, Mrs Rhuppiah met Ms Charles who suffers from a gravely debilitating illness. Mrs Rhuppiah lives with Ms Charles and provides care gratuitously to her. Mrs Rhuppiah’s leave to remain expired in 2009 and she had not been able to obtain a visa since then. She applied for leave to remain on the basis that her removal would breach her art 8 rights. The Secretary of State disagreed. The First-tier Tribunal upheld the Secretary of State’s decision, giving little weight to her private life, under s 117B(5) on the basis that it was established, it said, at a time when her status was “precarious”. Additionally, the First-tier Tribunal considered that Mrs Rhuppiah was not “financially independent” to which it is required to have regard under s 117B(3).

Happily for Mrs Rhuppiah, the long duration of the proceedings meant that before the appeal to the Supreme Court was heard, she had achieved continuous residence in the UK for 20 years, which provided her with another route to remain under the Immigration Rules. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court decided that it was appropriate to hear and determine the appeal which raised issues of wide application.

Read More

Tier 1 ILR and paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules

The case of R (Khan) v SSHD (Dishonesty, Tax Return, Paragraph 322(5)) [2018] UKUT 384 (IAC) (3 May 2018) is worth to have a look at. It set out principles that Secretary of State failed to consider when deciding on applications made by Tier 1 migrants.

In Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [1995] UKPC 4 Lord Nicholls said that “carelessness is not dishonesty” and thus the refusal was arguably irrational and unlawful. The Supreme Court approved of this statement in Ivey v Genting Casino [2017] UKSC 67.

The Tribunal noted that in response to the applicant’s reliance on the decision in Sagar Arun Samant [2017] UKAITUR JR65462016 (discussed here), the Home Office produced a list of cases where applicants had “jumped on the band wagon” but the Tribunal had rejected any evidence blaming the accountants. Very clear examples of this point were found in Kamal [2017] UKAITUR JR114172016Parveen and Saleem [2017] UKAITUR JR94402016 and other cases.

Read More

Safi and others (permission to appeal decisions) [2018] UKUT 00388 (IAC)

Key points on the case

(1) It is essential for a judge who is granting permission to appeal only on limited grounds to say so, in terms, in the section of the standard form document that contains the decision, as opposed to the reasons for the decision.

(2) It is likely to be only in very exceptional circumstances that the Upper Tribunal will be persuaded to entertain a submission that a decision which, on its face, grants permission to appeal without express limitation is to be construed as anything other than a grant of permission on all of the grounds accompanying the application for permission, regardless of what might be said in the reasons for decision section of the document.

D. Procedure Rules

11.     Rule 34 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Immigration & Asylum Chamber) Rules 2014 provides as follows:-

Tribunal’s consideration of an application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal

34.—(1) On receiving an application for permission to appeal the Tribunal must first consider whether to review the decision in accordance with rule 35.

(2) If the Tribunal decides not to review the decision, or reviews the decision and decides to take no action in relation to the decision, or part of it, the Tribunal must consider whether to give permission to appeal in relation to the decision or that part of it.

(3) The Tribunal must send a record of its decision to the parties as soon as practicable.

(4) If the Tribunal refuses permission to appeal it must send with the record of its decision—

(a) a statement of its reasons for such refusal; and

(b) notification of the right to make an application to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal and the time within which, and the manner in which, such application must be made.

(5) The Tribunal may give permission to appeal on limited grounds, but must comply with paragraph (4) in relation to any grounds on which it has refused permission.”

12.     So far as relevant, the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 provide as follows:-

Application to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal

21.—(1) …

(2) A person may apply to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a decision of another tribunal only if—

(a) they have made an application for permission to appeal to the tribunal which made the decision challenged; and

(b) that application has been refused or has not been admitted or has been granted only on limited grounds.

…”

20.     In Ferrer (limited appeal grounds; Alvi[2012] UKUT 00304 (IAC), difficulties arose in respect of a grant of permission that did not make it clear whether permission was granted only on limited grounds. The Upper Tribunal said this:-

“22. It is necessary at this stage to make two general points. First, as the present case illustrates, if on an application for permission to appeal the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber intends to grant permission only in respect of certain of the grounds, then the judge considering that application should make it abundantly plain that this is so, both in his or her decision under rule 25(5) and by ensuring that the Tribunal’s administrative staff send out the proper notice (currently IA68) so as to comply with rule 25(5). It should also be noted that rule 25(4)(a) requires “written reasons for a decision under this rule”, which means that written reasons are required both for granting an application on particular grounds and for refusing the application on particular grounds.”

23. Secondly, as a practical matter, the First-tier Tribunal should consider carefully the utility of granting permission only on limited grounds. Given that the effect of any grant of permission to the Upper Tribunal is to set in train proceedings on the case in question in the Upper Tribunal, a grant of permission on limited grounds will not, in practice, often be as helpful to the parties or to the Upper Tribunal as would a general grant of permission by reference to all of the applicant’s grounds, which nevertheless expressly identifies the ground or grounds that are considered by the First-tier Tribunal to have the strongest prospect of success. In this way, the First-tier Tribunal identifies the likely ambit of the forthcoming Upper Tribunal proceedings, which – if that Tribunal concurs – can then form the backdrop for the Upper Tribunal’s subsequent case management directions under rule 5 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (“the Upper Tribunal Rules”). It should also be noted that rule 15(1)(a) and (b) of those Rules expressly enables the Upper Tribunal to give directions as to the issues on which it requires evidence or submissions and the nature of the evidence or submissions it requires.”

21.     As is apparent, in Ferrer the Upper Tribunal was dealing with the predecessors of the 2014 Rules. Nothing of materiality turns on this, however.

22.     In Secretary of State for the Home Department v RodriguezMandalia and Patel v SSHD [2014] EWCA Civ 2, the Court of Appeal had to interpret the scope of permission to appeal from the First-tier Tribunal to the Upper Tribunal, as granted by the Upper Tribunal. In the case of Mr Mandalia, it became important to decide whether the Upper Tribunal had granted permission on one or both of two grounds, since this impacted upon the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.

Read More

Tier 1 changes and other planned changes

New Statement of Changes on the Immigration Rules being planned in December 2018, which should be implemented post Jan 2019. Some of the key points to take from the announcement is as follows:

  1. The Tier 1 Investor route is likely to be suspended, so that new changes can be planned by UKVI. The current policy and rules on the Tier 1 Investor route can be found here: https://icslegal.com/tier1-investors.php.
  2. Our understanding following the Immigration Minister’s statement is that the Tier 1 Investor route is currently being used by organised crime and money laundering.
  3. The current Tier 1 Entrepreneur visa is being replaced with the new “Innovator” route, which would bring forward new changes and requirements for those seeking to set up or buy a UK based business.

Nokes’ full written statement to the Commons is below:

“My rt hon Friend, the Home Secretary, will shortly be laying before the House a Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules.

“The Government is clear that entrepreneurs play a key role in creating jobs and driving economic growth, which is vital to the prosperity of the UK. In June of this year, we announced a new Start-up visa route. This will build upon the successes of the current Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur) route, expanding it to ensure that the UK can benefit from a wider pool of overseas talent looking to establish new businesses in the UK. Applicants will be endorsed by either a business or higher education institution sponsor.

“We are announcing that we will build on this offer further by introducing a new Innovator route, for more experienced business people. This will replace the current Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) route and have a similar emphasis on endorsement by a business sponsor, who will assess applicants’ business ideas for their innovation, viability and scalability.

“Alongside this, we will reform our Tier 1 (Investor) route.

“These reforms will be introduced in the spring and will ensure the UK remains a world-leading destination for investment and innovation. We will shortly be publishing a Statement of Intent setting out the details of how the reformed routes will work and I will place a copy in the House Library.

“We are also introducing wider changes through these Immigration Rules which demonstrate our commitment to supporting talented leaders in their fields, and promising future leaders, coming to the UK under the Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) route. The changes will expand this route to provide for a route of entry for leading architects endorsed by the Royal Institute of British Architects, under the remit of Arts Council England (ACE). This change builds upon other reforms to the route earlier this year, including doubling the number of places available, providing for faster settlement to existing leaders in their fields endorsed under this route, and expanding the route to leading fashion designers, also endorsed under the remit of ACE. We will continue to work closely with our partners in this route to attract more leading international talent to the UK.

“More broadly, the changes also include a number of minor, more technical changes to our Tier 1 and Tier 2 routes for highly skilled workers. These changes will be made to ensure the Immigration Rules remain up-to-date and for consistency purposes.

“The Government greatly values the roles played by our charities and religious institutions and those who wish to come to the UK to contribute to these organisations are extremely welcome. However, there are some issues with the routes as they currently operate.

“Our immigration system makes specific provision for both Ministers of Religion and those coming as religious workers. This distinction between the two roles reflects the importance we place on our faith leaders speaking English to a high standard, whilst at the same time still permitting other members of religious communities to contribute to the UK in non-pastoral roles.

“Whilst it is not the intention of the Tier 5 Religious Workers route, our current rules could permit religious workers to perform roles, that include preaching and leading a congregation, without first being required to demonstrate that they speak English to an acceptable standard. To address this, we are prohibiting Tier 5 Religious Workers filling roles as Ministers of Religion and direct them instead to do so through the correct Tier 2 Minister of Religion sub-category. This will require Ministers of Religion to demonstrate a strong command of English and ensure they can interact with the community around them.

“The Tier 5 arrangements for Religious Workers and Charity Workers have always been intended to provide for only limited periods of residence in the UK of up to two years. We have however seen instances of migrants in these categories repeatedly applying for consecutive periods of leave, in effect achieving ongoing residency in the UK. We will therefore introduce a ‘cooling off period’, preventing Tier 5 Religious Worker and Tier 5 Charity Worker visa holders from returning to the UK, via these immigration routes for 12 months after their visa expires. This change ensures that we will continue to welcome those coming to make a contribution to our religious and charity organisations, whilst at the same time underpinning the Government’s intention that these are temporary routes.

“On 6 September the Home Secretary issued a Written Ministerial Statement (HCWS940) announcing the introduction of a new pilot scheme for 2019, enabling non-EEA migrant workers to come to the UK to undertake seasonal employment in the Horticultural sector. These amendments will set out the legislative framework for introducing this pilot.

“This small-scale pilot will test the effectiveness of our immigration system at alleviating seasonal labour shortages during peak production periods, whilst maintaining robust immigration control and ensuring there are minimal impacts on local communities and public services.

“The organisations chosen to fill the role of scheme operators for this pilot have been selected following a fair and open selection process, undertaken by the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

“The formal date of implementation for this pilot will be announced in due course.”

If you require any immigration advice or believe your application may be affected by the new changes, speak to us today on 0207 237 3388 or email us at info@icslegal.com

Read More

Medical Training Initiative

The Medical Training Initiative (MTI) is a national scheme designed to allow a small number of doctors to enter the UK from overseas for a maximum of 24 months, so that they can benefit from training and development in NHS services before returning to their home countries.

Through the MTI, trainee doctors from countries outside the European Union are offered the opportunity to learn from experienced consultants within the UK national health system. From April 2017 the Department of Health, Health Education England and the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges agreed changes to the arrangements for processing applications for MTI Certificates of Sponsorship (CoS) from applicants from countries other than those identified as Department for International Development (DfID) priority countries or World Bank Low Income and Lower Middle Income Countries (LI & LMI).

New applications from countries not considered DfID priority or LI&LMI countries will be placed on a revised waiting list and will be processed only if and when there is capacity at the end of each calendar month. While we do not turn away applications for doctors based in other countries, applicants from these countries and employers will need to recognise that the waiting list may become quite long and reduce only slowly. This means that these applicants may be better off finding alternative routes for employment and immigration through Tier 2 entry.

After extensive consultation, Health Education England and the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges launched new standards for the Medical Training Initiative in February 2018. They are aimed at those administrating and approving placements and will sit alongside and complement guides and information which are already available on this site.

They set the benchmark for the minimum requirements of MTI schemes which last more than 6 months, are aimed at doctors and are for use across the whole of the United Kingdom. Recognising the variety of MTI schemes, the standards aim to give flexibility for the allocation of responsibilities, where more than one organisation is involved in providing the scheme. It is expected that organisations and individuals will work together to ensure the standards are met.

The MTI Scheme was established by the UK Department of Health in February of 2009 as an immigration category under the Tier 5 Government Authorised Exchange (GAE) class of the points based immigration system. The Tier 5 GAE permits entry to the UK for overseas nationals coming to undertake exchanges or educational initiatives sponsored by government departments.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges took on the role of National Sponsor of the scheme in March of 2010. As National Sponsor the Academy is responsible for the issuance of Tier 5 certificates of sponsorship to be used for visa application. Additionally, the Academy plays a role an integral role in promotion of the scheme..

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges is also an ‘A-Rated Sponsor’. This means MTI applicants will not be required to provide evidence of £945 in a savings account as part of their Tier 5 visa application.

The prioritisation and allocation criteria were updated in January 2017 to reflect the Department of Health’s main focus for doctors from the DFiD priority and L&LMI countries to benefit from the scheme and, therefore giving priority to developing healthcare systems; the new criteria reflects the principles and intent of the scheme, more information can be seen on the Prospective Applicants page.

Read More

£2.3 billion boost and 1,600 jobs created as UK tech goes global

The Prime Minister will host a raft of cutting-edge companies for a roundtable, as part of London Tech Week, to showcase Britain as the best place in the world to run a tech company. This event kicks off a series of roundtables to drive inward investment in key sectors.

Companies announcing investment today include:

  • Salesforce, who are investing of $2.5 billion in the UK over the next five years, which will include the opening of a second UK data centre in 2019
  • Mubadala, who are launching £300 million European investment fund based in the UK
  • NTT data who are investing £41million to open a new office and Innovation Centre, creating up to 200 jobs over the next three years

The Prime Minister will in turn make a number of commitments so that tech companies will also benefit from government funding, and greater access to talent and data under new plans.

These announcements will include:

  • a new £2.5 billion British Patient Capital programme, which is expected to attract a further £5 billion in private investment, to support UK companies with high growth potential to access the long-term investment they need to grow and go global
  • a new Start-Up Visa for entrepreneurs will launch in Spring 2019. This will replace a visa route which was exclusively for graduates, opening it up to talented business founders. This will include accelerators playing a role in the endorsement of candidates
  • Roger Taylor will be announced as Chair of the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation, alongside a consultation on the role of the Centre – a key part of plans for a new National Data Strategy
  • opening up key parts of the Ordnance Survey’s valuable geospatial data to small businesses for free to boost competition in the digital economy
  • two new Tech Hubs will be launched in Brazil and South Africa, to build innovative partnerships and develop skills, capability and business networks in these markets

Over 180 tech founders, entrepreneurs and investors will also attend a reception at Downing Street this evening, which will celebrate the UK’s position as a world-leading destination for tech investment.

Britain is leading Europe in tech investment as evidenced last week when Amazon announced the creation of 2,500 jobs, and yesterday when Big Commerce announced that it will open its first European office in London this year. BT also announced yesterday that it has built the UK’s first practical quantum-secured high-speed fibre network between Cambridge and Ipswich.

Last year, British tech businesses attracted $7.8 billion of funding, almost double the amount received in 2016, compared to France and Germany’s combined total of $6 billion and the Prime Minister will reaffirm that the UK’s leadership is set to grow as our modern Industrial Strategy drives further investment in centres of UK expertise.

Some 2.1 million people are now employed in the digital tech economy and a new digital tech job is created in the UK every 50 minutes, according to new estimates released this week by Dealroom and Tech Nation.

Founders Forum, who will be in Downing Street today, will also launch a new start-up competition across UK secondary schools and universities to inspire the next generation of entrepreneurs.

Prime Minister Theresa May said:

The measures we are announcing today will allow innovative British start-ups to invest in their future – and in the UK – by hiring more skilled people, expanding their business and exporting their expertise across the world.

It’s a great time to be in tech in the UK, and our modern Industrial Strategy will drive continued investment, ensuring the nation flourishes in the industries of the future and creating more high-paying jobs.

Chancellor Philip Hammond said:

The UK is home to some of the world’s most innovative companies and I want to make sure that they stay at the forefront of the tech revolution. So, British Patient Capital will provide an extra £2.5 billion for these cutting-edge business ensuring Britain remains one of the best places to start and grow a company.

International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox said:

The UK is already a world-leading destination for tech investment with one tech start-up opening every 50 minutes. Our tech sector, with our strong legal system, skilled workforce and low taxation economy combine with our world class universities to make us the most attractive home for investment in Europe.

As an international economic department, DIT will continue to encourage investment from overseas with a further series of events to attract inward business. Last month we launched a new online portfolio of opportunities worth £30 billion, and in turn this will drive growth and create jobs in our economy.

Culture Secretary, Media and Sport Matt Hancock said:

Britain is a digital dynamo with the government and tech sector working together to help make this country the best place in the world to start and grow a digital business. We’re encouraging the best and brightest tech talent to come to the UK and creating the right conditions for our high growth digital businesses to thrive.

We are spearheading digital innovation in exciting areas such as Artificial Intelligence and our network of tech hubs will connect us with some of the leading emerging technology nations across the world to share best practice.

Read More

PM speech to Times CEO Summit: 26 June 2018

Introduction

As business leaders, you will understand exactly what the nineteenth century American politician Daniel Webster meant when, as a young man, he was considering what career to pursue.

After some thought, he decided to become a lawyer.

His friends told him it was a bad idea.

It was highly competitive. Most people who tried it did not succeed.

Hadn’t he better choose a field in which it would be easier to find a place?

No, he replied. ‘There’s always room at the top.’

Real success does not come from setting your sights low.

It comes from striving to be the best.

That is what British businesses have always done.

You create the wealth and the jobs that provide the backbone of our economy.

Your innovation and creativity are vital ingredients in our success as a nation.

A Conservative government will always listen to your voice and back you every step of the way as you help grow our economy and create more good jobs.

And what’s true for businesses is true for nation states in a globalised economy – to stand still is to fall behind.

The United Kingdom is not standing still.

In leaving the EU we are charting a new course in a changing world.

Brexit presents significant opportunities and I am confident that we can build a more prosperous and secure United Kingdom in the years ahead.

To do so, we must achieve the best Brexit deal, pursue our modern Industrial Strategy to deliver jobs and growth, and make sure our economy truly works for everyone in society.

The best Brexit deal

In the Brexit negotiations, we continue to make good progress.

You will each have conducted negotiations yourself, so you will know that they are never straightforward.

They are complex and can generate uncertainty.

But at every stage of the Brexit process we have sought to reduce uncertainty as much as possible.

Last week Parliament approved the EU Withdrawal Bill and today it will receive Royal Assent.

It will provide the legal certainty we need to ensure a smooth and orderly Brexit.

In December we achieved sufficient progress in the first phase of the negotiations, reaching agreement on the rights of EU citizens and UK citizens in Europe; on a good financial settlement for taxpayers; and on the need for no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.

In March we reached agreement with the EU on an implementation period to ensure a period of time for business and citizens to adjust to the new relationship after we leave in March 2019.

Next month we will publish a White Paper setting out in detail what our future relationship with the EU should look like.

We have listened carefully to the voices of business throughout, and your input has helped to shape our negotiating position.

Our goal – a deep and special partnership that ensures trade remains as free and frictionless as possible and allows established patterns of trade to continue without disruption – is ambitious but it is achievable, because it is in the mutual interest of the UK and the EU.

To make a success of life outside the EU, and to fully seize the opportunities it will present, getting the right Brexit deal will be essential.

But this alone will not be sufficient. We also need to look to the future in a fast-changing world and ensure that our economy is ready to rise to the challenge of creating the jobs of tomorrow.

Our modern Industrial Strategy is our plan to do just that.

The Modern Industrial Strategy

It is rooted in the belief that free markets provide the best engine for growth, jobs and prosperity.

Its premise is very simple: for businesses to thrive, government has to step up and secure the foundations of productivity.

Providing an education system that works with business to deliver the rights skills mix for our economy.

Improving standards in our schools.

Encouraging diverse provision in higher education.

Transforming technical education with new high-quality T-levels that are every bit as good as A-levels, and Institutes of Technology to provide higher-level training.

Young people in school or in college today will start their careers in the economies of the 2020s and 2030s.

They will live to do jobs that do not yet exist, and may change sectors several times during their careers.

So our new national re-training scheme will help workers of all ages adapt their skills to the needs of the future.

We also need to deliver the infrastructure for growth – faster trains, bigger stations, better road connections, next generation mobile and broadband.

That is what we are doing with the biggest roadbuilding programme since the 1970s, the biggest investment in our railways since Victorian times, and a National Productivity Investment fund of over £30 billion to boost housebuilding and transform our digital infrastructure.

Last night the House of Commons backed building a third runway at Heathrow – a vote of confidence in the UK’s determination to compete on an international stage and win new global trade in the years ahead.

We will also ensure that people have the homes they need in the places they want to live, by changing the planning rules and doing much more to turn planning permissions into bricks and mortar.

Housing is as an essential infrastructure investment within the Industrial Strategy. Making housing more affordable will free up resources for more productive investment and help people move homes more easily, leading to a more productive workforce.

This will not deliver change overnight, but that is what Industrial Strategy is all about: taking action for the long-term that will pay dividends in the future.

The role of the state, however, goes beyond simply fixing those essential economic foundations.

Government, the private sector and academia working as strategic partners achieve far more than we would separately and alone.

To compete in a globalised economy and play to our historic strengths as innovators and pioneers, both the public and private sector need to invest in the ideas of the future.

So we have set an ambitious goal of lifting UK public and private research and development investment to 2.4 per cent of GDP by 2027.

To guide this joint endeavour, we are working with business and academia to develop the four Grand Challenges that sit at the heart of the modern Industrial Strategy.

These are four of the big drivers of social and economic change in the world today, which carry huge potential for economic growth if we face them head on.

First, artificial intelligence and the data revolution – which are transforming business models and employment practices.

Second, changes in the future of mobility – which are revolutionising how we travel and move goods.

Third, our ageing society – which makes new demands but also creates new opportunities.

And fourth, the revolution in clean growth that our commitment to fight climate change is driving.

By focusing our efforts on meeting these four Grand Challenges we can develop new exports, grow new industries, and create more good jobs.

We know that setting clear missions can drive human endeavour, leading to faster solutions to the problems we face.

So last month I set the first four missions in each of the Grand Challenge areas.

Saving lives by using data, AI and innovation to transform the prevention, early diagnosis and treatment of diseases like cancer, diabetes, heart disease and dementia.

Helping people live independent lives for longer through new technology.

Cleaning our air by making all cars and vans effectively zero emission by 2040.

And protecting our planet by halving the energy use of new buildings by 2030.

These are ambitious goals to drive faster progress in delivering social improvements that will benefit everyone.

An economy that works for everyone

We should never forget that the primary purpose of our economic policy must be to raise the living standards and protect the livelihoods of the British people.

And for people to retain confidence in a free market economy, they must feel the benefits of it and see clearly that everyone is playing by the same rules.

This is more important now than ever.

When people become disenchanted by the economic system we have a choice – simple, populist answers that seek to smash that system – or reforming solutions that recognise people’s concerns as genuine and enlist the power of business to change itself for the better.

That’s why the Industrial Strategy makes spreading jobs and prosperity across the UK, especially to communities that have been left behind, a priority.

It is why we are strengthening the UK’s corporate governance regime, to give workers and shareholders a stronger voice and incentivise firms to take decisions for the long-term.

As employment practices evolve, that is why we are implementing the recommendations of the Taylor review, updating the rules so that good, rewarding, work remains available for all.

And from closing the gender pay gap and getting more women onto boards, to broadening the social and ethnic diversity of management – there is so much that you, as business leaders, can do to create an economy that is more deserving of public support.

Conclusion: being the best

The United Kingdom is a great country with a bright future.

After years of hard work and sacrifice from the British people, we can now move forward with our balanced approach to the public finances that gets debt falling while also investing in our public services.

The fruits of that labour have put us in the position to announce a major investment in our NHS – the public service we value most dearly – to secure it for the future.

That will not just deliver better care, it will also ensure that businesses have a healthy and productive workforce to draw from.

We are blessed with tremendous assets.

We speak the global language of business.

The Greenwich meridian puts us in the perfect time-zone for international commerce.

London is the world’s premier financial hub.

We are home to the planet’s finest universities.

We have produced more Nobel Prize winners than any country apart from America.

Our system of representative government is replicated around the globe.

Our courts set the gold standard for incorruptibility.

Our soft power is unrivalled.

Our cultural, intellectual, and technological contributions to the world are without equal.

And our ambition for the future is to be the very best we can be.

To get the best possible Brexit deal.

To build an economy that works for everyone.

There is room at the top of tomorrow’s global economy for a country with our talents and ambition.

You all have a vital role to play in getting Britain there.

Read More